The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm

Brexit
Brexit: human resourcing
implications
Maranda Ridgway
Nottingham Business School, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK
1033
Abstract Received 29 November 2018
Purpose – Three years on from the Brexit vote, while it remains a central topic for debate in the media, there Revised 29 April 2019
has been limited discussion about the human resource (HR) implications. The purpose of this paper is to 9 May 2019
Accepted 17 May 2019
provide theoretical evaluation and informed discussion, distilled into four interconnected propositions, on
how employee resourcing as a HR practice may be impacted following actual Brexit decisions.
Design/methodology/approach – Drawing on the employee resourcing literature, the paper adopts a
discursive approach which examines how the UK’s decision to exit the European Union will affect HR
practice. The paper draws comparison with the global recession since 2008, a similarly unprecedented
development in its discussion of employee resourcing practices and draws parallels which may help to inform
the future of HR practices in the UK, because of Brexit.
Findings – This paper offers a set of propositions; the flow of talent into the UK may become more restricted
and reinvigorate the “war for talent” that followed the effects of the global financial crisis on the UK. To
attract and retain workers in relatively lower-skilled roles, employers may be faced with a need to re-skill such
roles and adopt more flexible working arrangements. Finally, to meet skilled employment requirements,
removal of restrictions to recruit from within the European Economic Area may trigger increased global
migration of skilled workers.
Originality/value – This paper contributes to the discussions regarding the implications of Brexit for HR
practice by offering propositions to shape future research agendas.
Keywords Migration, Labour market, Brexit, Employee resourcing, Human resource practice
Paper type Conceptual paper

Introduction
The recruitment and selection of workers, the practice of managing people and the working
lives of employees will all be affected fundamentally by Brexit. This paper offers informed
discussion of potential implications for human resource (HR) practices that flow from Brexit.
It does so by focussing on the economic impact of Brexit, its effects on workers’ rights and
xenophobia which Brexit has stimulated (Ford, 2016; Hatzigeorgiou and Lodefalk, 2016;
Stewart, 2017). The paper identifies four HR issues that are likely to be significantly affected
by Brexit, namely employee retention, labour market skillset, increased non-European
Union (EU) immigration and increased flexible working. The discussion of these four issues
culminates in four propositions that are likely to inform HR practice once the UK has
formally left the EU; each of these propositions is likely to shape future work and
employment research agendas. While the focus of this paper is on Brexit, wider implications
can be drawn regarding the ways that organisations respond to crises and uncertainty.
In June 2016, a national referendum resulted in the UK’s unprecedented decision to leave
the EU – a decision to “Brexit”. Article 50, the formal process of withdrawal from the EU,
has since been triggered and the official separation of the UK from the EU is now in motion.
While associated negotiations are underway, the distance between these and the
implications of the decision for employers going forward after Brexit becomes real are
uncertain and create associated economic, legal and political volatility for employers
(Linacre, 2017).
Employee Relations: The
International Journal
Vol. 41 No. 5, 2019
pp. 1033-1045
The author is grateful for the guidance received from Professor Ian Clark and Professor Daniel King © Emerald Publishing Limited
0142-5455
and for the valuable comments received from the anonymous reviewer. DOI 10.1108/ER-11-2018-0310
ER Due to the unprecedented nature of the event, there is currently no empirical research to
41,5 explain what Brexit means for HR practice. Despite this absence, informed discussion can
draw on the impact of other significant economic events, such as the recession of 2008–2009,
on HR practice. During the global financial crisis, many organisations were forced to reduce
headcount, yet talent was also seen as one of the “determining factors in turning the
downturn into long-term organizational sustainability and success” (Lea, 2018; McDonnell,
1034 2011, p. 169). The uncertainty caused by Brexit has already resulted in several organisations
downsizing their UK operations, for example, Airbus, Jaguar Land Rover and Nissan
(Chapman, 2019). In parallel, however, some organisations are reporting skills shortages
(CIPD, 2017b). There is an increasing number of academic and practitioner publications in
different fields (cf. Martin and Gardiner, 2019) which are using the impact of previous
recessions to assess the potential impact of Brexit. Furthermore, Wood and Budhwar (2016)
suggest positioning unexpected events, such as Brexit, in the context of historical crises.
Arguably, the 2008–2009 recession triggered the “euro crisis” which in turn kindled initial
discussions about Brexit (Startin, 2015; Capelos et al., 2018).
In this regard, the global financial crisis presents a useful comparison to the uncertainty
caused by Brexit to provide theoretical evaluation and informed discussion on its
implications for employee resourcing as an HR practice. For example, one feature of
employer reaction to the financial crisis was “labour hoarding” which in turn contributed to
the notion of “a jobless recovery” in more recent years as part of the UK’s productivity
puzzle (Dolphin and Hatfield, 2015), although, as Elsby and Smith (2010) suggest, the
volume of job loss implies that labour hoarding may not have contributed to increased
unemployment. Other impacts of the 2008–2009 recession, as reported by Bell and
Blanchflower (2010), included an increase in unemployment, notably in the youth labour
market, an increase in university applications despite only a limited increase in the number
of places, and fiscal stimulus by the government to increase employment levels. In more
recent years, we have also witnessed an increase in the number of self-employed jobs
facilitated by temporary work agencies (O’Reilly et al., 2016) indicating that while
employment levels may have increased, there is a subsequent reduction in employment
protection and stability.
The perceived levels of EU migration into the UK was one of the most contentious issues
underpinning the Brexit vote (Alfano et al., 2016); how immigration will be affected by
Brexit and the subsequent impact of Brexit on the mobility of talent from the EU into the UK
in the future remains unclear. The EU Settlement Scheme allows EU, European Economic
Area (EEA) and Swiss citizens who are currently living in the UK to apply to settle before
the UK leaves the EU. Indications from the government (2018) suggest that reciprocal
agreements between the UK and EU will allow UK citizens living in the EU the right to do
the same moving forwards. Widely varying speculations have been made as to the effect of
Brexit on the UK labour market with polarised opinions declaring the extent to which the
country will benefit or suffer detriment. Teague and Donaghey (2018, p. 515) for example,
suggest that the Brexit will lead to “wide-spread employment shortages and a significant
increase in labour costs”. What is clear is the instability caused by Brexit requires
businesses to make internal changes to remain competitive.
The last time that UK businesses experienced uncertainty was during the financial crisis.
This paper draws on the financial crisis as a comparator to examine how organisations
responded in novel ways to a volatile labour market. While the volatility of the labour market
can be likened to the recent recession (Teague and Roche, 2014), the practical implications for
HR practice are, as yet, unclear. Scholars have been criticised as being slow to respond to
unexpected events, such as Brexit (Wood and Budhwar, 2016); the continuing uncertainty is
having a profound effect on people’s lives and thus warrants discussion and consideration
despite the uncertainty. Academic work is conventionally produced after the event; however,
this paper seeks to learn from the literature relating to the last financial crisis to develop Brexit
propositions based on how employee resourcing may be impacted following Brexit.
The agreed delay of Brexit until 31 October 2019 points to the need to generate
momentum in the debate about the potential implications of Brexit through informed
discussion. In doing so, this paper presents practical HR implications, considers
organisational responses to uncertainty and offers an agenda for future research.
1035
Employee resourcing
Employee resourcing, as an HR practice, focuses on the strategic imperative to ensure that
an organisation can access the people necessary to achieve its objectives (Armstrong, 2017).
In the absence of detailed policy one notable outcome of Brexit is uncertainty about how the
movement of talent within the EU will change. Uncertainty, such as this, presents four
challenges for employee resourcing; each is outlined and then summarised in a proposition
on employee resourcing.

Employee retention and recruitment

The perceived levels of migration from the EU into the UK was one of the most contentious
issues underpinning the majority vote to leave the EU. While negotiations are underway to
manage the movement of people, this negotiation remains central to the future relationship
between the UK and the EU to mitigate the subsequent economic impact (Alfano et al., 2016).
Despite the claim that migration reduces employment opportunities for UK nationals, there
is limited empirical evidence to suggest any correlation between increased immigration and
unemployment among the “British born” population. A report by the Centre for Economic
Performance found that migration from the EU has not adversely impacted employment
levels, wages or public services and that migrants from the EU contribute more in taxation
terms than they utilise through welfare (Wadsworth et al., 2016). These findings reflect an
earlier study by Dustmann et al. (2005), which also found that there is no strong evidence
that indicates a negative impact on employment and wages as a result of immigration. It is
anticipated by respective EU governments that, in addition to a reduced inflow to the UK of
workers from the EU, the UK will witness an increase in the number of existing EU workers
returning home from the UK, regardless of their longer-term residency status (Wasik, 2017).
This tendency may be exacerbated by the increase in xenophobic crimes, since the Brexit
decision, experienced by EU nationals currently residing in the UK (Stewart, 2017; Sharman
and Jones, 2017). It may be the case that a larger number of skilled British nationals will seek
to emigrate in search of stability (Ridgway, 2017); indeed, the Office for National Statistics
(2019) reports the number of EU nationals working in the UK has fallen by 61,000 during
2017 and 2018, whereas emigration has remained stable for the same period. One outcome
from the 2008–2009 recession was an increase in net emigration from the UK as the
weakened pound made the UK a less attractive home for migrant workers (Chubb et al.,
2010); it is likely that Brexit will trigger a similar trend.
Prior to the 2008–2009 recession, employee engagement policies provided an
organisational focus to support the growing demand for highly skilled and mobile
professionals (Farndale et al., 2010). The increasing need to recruit and retain staff triggered
a “war for talent”, a term originally coined by McKinsey & Company in 1997. Due to the
impact of the 2008–2009 recession on the British job market which resulted in many
organisations downsizing, some, including Peter Cheese the CIPD’s Chief Executive,
considered the “war for talent” to be over (Cheese, 2010). As the economy recovered, it
became clear that the “war for talent” continued as organisations had to provide stronger
justification to invest in talent to meet changing business demands and organisational
structures, post-recession (Scullion et al., 2011). Despite the uncertainty caused by Brexit,
pressures of global competition are not diminishing, and likened to the aftermath of the
ER global financial crisis, talented individuals remain critical to the success of organisations in
41,5 the global arena (Vaiman et al., 2012). The 2008–2009 recession significantly impacted the
supply and demand of talented resources, particularly in relation to “implementing global
mobility strategies” (Sparrow et al., 2013, p. 1794). The same argument can be made for
Brexit as the demand for talent increases and the mobility of individuals across
international borders becomes more challenging. Brexit may increase the exit of workers,
1036 both EU and “British born” citizens, which will act as a catalyst to further intensify the “war
for talent”. Previous studies (Cheese, 2010; Elving et al., 2013) illustrate that in response to
the “war on talent” organisations refocus their energies into redefining their employee value
propositions. This refocus is reflected in a recent report by the CIPD (2017c), which finds
that 86 per cent of organisations are focussed on renewing their employer brand. To
summarise, in the light of evidence from the recent financial recession, the potential impact
that Brexit will have on employee turnover and the continuing need for organisations to
attract and retain talent leads to the following proposition:
P1. Brexit will intensify the “war for talent”, triggering a renewed focus on engagement
strategies and employer brand proposition development.

Labour market skillset

There is a perception that migrant workers from the EU are typically employed in unskilled, or
lower skilled, job roles. This view has been amplified, since the Brexit outcome through the
publication of papers which demonstrate that at organisations, such as Pret a Manger, only 50
per cent of job applicants are from the UK (Sullivan, 2017). Teague and Donaghey (2018)
suggest that the access to labour through the free movement of people has resulted in an
underinvestment in the development of skills by employers. Job applicants from outside of the
UK, in this case and other labour-intensive industries such as construction, can be considered
“posted workers” a form of temporary labour migration leading to greater labour market
segmentation and host society disconnection (Caro et al., 2017). Alfano et al. (2016) suggest,
however, that migrant workers arriving in the UK, on average, hold higher levels of educational
attainment than their “British born” counterparts. Migration should not be oversimplified, as
the concept of super-diversity neccessitates the need to delayer societal impacts on, and
perceptions of, migrant workers (Vertovec, 2007). For example, super-diversity extends beyond
traditional migration patterns to recognise changing configurations of migrant workers’
gender, age and human capital, among other demographics and characterisitcs (Meissner and
Vertovec, 2015). Alfano et al. (2016) report that, on average, migrant workers from the EEA
receive a lower wage compared to “British born” counterparts.
A reluctance by “British born” workers to accept particular job roles, for example those
in labour-intensive industries, where labour costs directly affect product costs, may lead to
an increase in wages to attract “British born” workers. The increased cost of production,
however, can trigger the products in labour-intensive industries being imported from
countries with lower labour costs resulting in a reduction of the UK production, thus leading
to reduced employment in the UK (Alfano et al., 2016). This argument indicates a gap that
employers will face, bringing into question the real cost of talent, as the reduced movement
of labour may trigger wage inflation as higher wages are needed to maintain
competititiveness in attracting and retaining labour (Wright et al., 2016). Wadsworth
et al. (2016), to the contrary, argue that reduced trade and foreign investment post-Brexit will
in fact lower wages in the UK as migrant workers from the EU currently consume goods
and services which provide jobs in the UK, thus the reduced demand will affect the supply of
employment opportunities. While generalisations cannot be made that all areas of the labour
market will be affected by Brexit in the same way, it is clear that there will be some impact
to wages and employment levels in the UK.
 Brinkley and Crowley (2017) suggest that reduced access to migrant labour from the EU Brexit
may lead to a concentrated re-invesment in upskilling the existing workforce. However, they
also argue that this aspiration may be frustrated in many sectors because the lagging skill
levels across the UK leave the nation ill-prepared to cope in post-Brexit times with the
prospect of reduced talent mobility. A study by Robson (2009) indicated that it takes time
for workers to adjust their skillset to move between diminishing and growing sectors.
While it could be assumed that an economic downturn, such as the 2008–2009 recession, 1037
may have a negative impact on the investment on training, Felstead et al. (2012) report that
spend on training continued during economic recovery. Moreover, a report by the CIPD
(2017a) indicates that 26 per cent of organisations have increased their focus on staff
development and in comparison with the 2008–2009 recession upgrading skills is now
critical to maintaining productivity, competitiveness and facilitating new business
opportunities, as a means to survive the recession (Mason and Bishop, 2015). Accordingly,
the necessity for greater skills development at all levels across the UK to maintain
productivity and competitiveness leads to a second proposition:
P2. Brexit will trigger a requirement to re-skill and/or up-skill workers to meet the
increasing wages required to employ British workers in less attractive job roles.

Increased immigration from outside of the EU

The increase in migration is a phenomenon that is experienced globally and is not limited to
the UK (Varma and Russell, 2016; Ridgway and Robson, 2018); furthermore, the growth of
the migrant population in the UK is not disproportionate to other countries (Alfano et al.,
2016). Despite articulating how skilled migrant workers benefitted the UK, prior to Brexit, a
critical governmental objective was to reduce reliance on economic migration from outside
EEA (Migration Advisory Committee, 2015). As previously mentioned, migration numbers
were one of the most contentious issues during the Brexit referendum (Portes, 2016;
Simionescu et al., 2017). The government has proposed an end to the free movement of
people and cessation of differentiating between EU and non-EU citizens in terms of
immigration. The proposed changes are likely to reduce the inflow of migrant workers by
80 per cent (HM Government, 2018) and increase the number of highly skilled migrants
leaving the UK as the weakened pound makes the UK a less attractive work destination
(Portes and Forte, 2017). It is further anticipated that any restrictions on the freedom of
movement will impact recruitment (Wright et al., 2016) as employers will struggle to fill
resource gaps caused by the reduced free movement of people (Portes and Forte, 2016). The
policy proposals are not finalised (HM Government, 2018), but even if the freedom of
movement is maintained, in the short-to-medium term it is likely that the UK will experience
labour shortages (Cory et al., 2017). For example, the NHS is already seeking applications
from nurses from outside the EEA (Marangozov and Williams, 2016); the Migration
Advisory Committee (2015) has identified nursing as a shortage occupation to ease visa
applications but may counteract the short fall left by the removal of open borders. Concerns
have also been expressed in the construction industry, which is largely populated by EU
workers but currently has a low representation of non-EU workers due to complexities in
securing work permits (Sweet and Smith, 2017). Furthermore, a report by the CIPD (2017c)
found that 75 per cent of respondent organisations reported difficulties filling vacancies
regardless of sector. The report suggests that the public sector is more likely to recruit non-
EU migrant workers, while the number of EU migrants that are hired is unlikely to change
even if they face the same restrictions as non-EU migrants.
Post-Brexit, citizens from EEA countries may receive preference for future skilled
migration (Portes and Forte, 2017), yet interestingly, as Alfano et al. (2016) report, immigration
from outside the EEA has always been greater than from within the EEA. Concerns about the
ER reliance on skilled migrant workers to fill skills gap have been raised by the Migration
41,5 Advisory Committee (2015). The committee has called for a reduction in the reliance on skilled
migrant workers by incentivising investment in domestic skills development.
Economic crises cause additional barriers to international mobility, impacting national
labour markets (Trenz and Triandafyllidou, 2017). During the 2008–2009 recession, there
was a decline in EU immigration (Woolfson, 2017), however, the economic climate did not
1038 deter the recruitment of migrant workers from outside the EU. As the number of UK
nationals within UK employment decreased, the employment of non-UK nationals increased
during the same period (Churchard, 2009). The 2008–2009 recession caused inbound
unskilled and low skilled migration to fall, while there was limited increase to the
marginalisation of existing migrant workers, this may be explained by an increased
acceptance of poor working conditions or decreased wages (Tilly, 2011). The UK’s aging
population and falling birth rates (Office for National Statistics, 2017) suggest an increased
requirement of young migrant workers to supplement the workforce (Tilly, 2011).
In summary, Brexit could lead to an increased reliance on non-EU migrant workers
(Rolfe, 2016), dependent on if, and how, the UK government decides to operate a post-Brexit
work permit system in lieu of free movement (Sumption, 2017a, b). If Brexit results in
restrictions on the freedom of movement of EU workers, employers have indicated that they
will need to be more proactive in recruiting UK workers and workers from outside the EEA
(Davies and Rolfe, 2017), particularly in the public sector (CIPD, 2017c). Thus, the third
proposition on HR practice post-Brexit is that:
P3. The reduced level of migrant labour arriving from the EU will lead to organisations
proactively targeting recruitment campaigns outside of the EEA.

Increased flexible working arrangements

REC (2012) reports a growth of flexible working in the UK. Flexible work is noted as a
method of retention (Chubb et al., 2010); during the 2008–2009 recession it was positioned as
a cost saving initiative, it is now utilised as a method of engagement, incentive and
motivation. Furthermore, flexibility is acknowledged to attract a more diverse range of
talent (Cheese, 2010). Contrary to assumptions that the 2008–2009 recession was responsible
for an increase in temporary work, REC (2010) reported that temporary work, despite
potential instability, is more attractive than permanent work due to the increased flexibility
that it offers. More recently, REC (2012) also reports that flexible work practices are more
widely available in the UK than in most EU counterpart countries positioning the UK as an
attractive employment destination. This argument suggests that maintaining workplace
flexibility is critical to retaining and attracting EU workers post-Brexit.
As Millennials have grown to be the largest proportion of the workforce, flexibility is
now a more valuable workplace incentive (Krakovsky, 2017) and has become a standard
expectation rather than a sought after benefit (Tlaiss et al., 2017). Furthermore, aligned with
the second proposition on the labour market skillset, a multi-skilled workforce will enhance
organisational resilience and enable flexible working in roles where, traditionally, flexibility
could not be offered, such as blue-collar jobs that often involve manual labour (see
Krakovsky, 2017).
The shift to platform capitalism (Srnicek, 2017) has led to the “gig economy”, or the
“informalization” of work, having grown significantly in recent years with 15 per cent of
workers now considered as self-employed and over 800,000 workers employed on
zero-hours contracts (Office for National Statistics, 2016) and the debate is ongoing whether
the primary driver is workers’ desire for flexibility or employers’ needs to reduce costs. A
crucial debate remains as to whether “gig workers” are considered employees or contractors;
recent cases, such as Uber, suggest the former. Some forms of flexible working practices,
however, are detrimental (Coyle, 2016), for example, zero-hour contracts create a power Brexit
imbalance between employer and worker (Taylor et al., 2017). Furthermore, the aftermath of
the global financial crisis has led to an increase in precarious employment for many people
in the UK and EU labour markets (ILO, 2012). Teague and Donaghey (2018) argue that the
free movement of “cheap labour” from the EU has been central to precarious employment in
the UK. Flexible working practices can, however, support candidate attraction as they allow
individuals to work in different ways (Taylor et al., 2017) and can, therefore, increase 1039
workplace diversity by making work accessible to more people.
REC (2012) suggests that flexible working arrangements produce a more agile and
resilient workforce which is well positioned to adjust to economic changes. Although
speculation may be expressed by HR professionals that Brexit could have a detrimental
effect on flexible working practices if the UK is no longer governed by EU provisions, this
is an unlikely outcome as the UK’s provision for maternity, paternity and annual leave is
already enhanced in comparison to the minimum EU standard (Suff, 2016). While this is
positive for those who are permanently employed, the impact to unskilled workers, however,
may result in reduced levels of employment protection (Orazulike, 2018).
While there is an argument that the sharing economy, a form of platform capitalism
which exploits workers through a deficit of appropriate employment regulation, will be a
“short-lived phenomenon” (Srnicek, 2017), the immediate workforce deficit that Brexit
may cause could lead to an increase in the need for flexible work practices before this form
of business model diminishes. The uncertainty caused by Brexit is affecting the supply
and demand of goods and services, in turn reinforcing the necessity of temporary workers
as a means of responding to a fluctuating labour market (Orazulike, 2018). As the
workforce demographic and expectations continue to change, amplified by Brexit, it is
proposed that:
P4. Traditional staffing models will be challenged, driven by the need to increase
flexibility to attract and retain a changing workforce.

Discussion
Brexit is certainly unprecedented, and the recency and prolific nature of the event positions
it as a “hot topic” for discussion. To develop the propositions in this paper, it has been
necessary to draw on past insight and apply this to the current phenomena, in order to
predict future implications (Webster and Watson, 2002). For example, drawing on
comparisons from the 2008–2009 recession enables informed discussion of the economic
impact of Brexit and potential implications for HR practice. A conceptual approach is useful
to address the topic as there is, as yet, no empirical data available (Sutton and Staw, 1995).
Paradoxically, the younger generation who were more likely to vote Remain (Hobolt,
2016) will be most impacted by workplace changes due to the Leave vote prevailing.
The increased representation of Generation Y and Millennials in the workforce will place
a demand on organisations to demonstrate their social and economic responsibilities to
potential recruits (Kuron et al., 2015; Williams and Turnbull, 2015). The changing workforce
demography in the UK (Office for National Statistics, 2017) and anticipated reduction in
young migrant workers arriving from the EU is resulting in a tighter labour market. In
response to the tightening labour market, organisations will need to reimagine their
employer brand to retain their top talent and attract new talent.
Brexit negotiations are still underway and different scenarios (depending on whether the
UK remains a member of the customs union or EU single market or leaves without a deal)
will significantly influence the impact to human resourcing practices in different ways.
Regardless of the finite detail which emerges from Brexit, there has been, and arguably will
continue to be, a profound effect on the UK labour market. The volatility caused by Brexit
ER and current pace of change make it challenging to identify practical implications. Since this
41,5 paper was first drafted the discourse has shifted from a “hard” or “soft” Brexit to scenarios
ranging from a “no deal” Brexit, to another referendum, to a general election.

Brexit: hard or soft?

There has not been a formal definition of what “hard” and “soft” Brexit mean, and while
1040 these terms are losing traction in the mainstream media, they remain useful to consider the
broad implications to the labour market and subsequent HR practices. A “hard” Brexit
scenario would witness the cessation of all trade agreements with the EU (Menon and
Fowler, 2016; Brakman et al., 2018). While this scenario may appear favourable to “Leave”
voters as it allows for a firmer stance to be taken on the issue of immigration, a recent white
paper (HM Government, 2018) indicates that the government’s intention is towards a softer
Brexit. A “soft” Brexit would result in the UK being a non-EU member of the EEA, requiring
a commitment to the freedom of movement (Menon and Fowler, 2016).
If a “hard” Brexit was to ensue the propositions outlined in this paper would be
amplified. The removal of the freedom of movement and possible requirement for existing
EU workers in the UK to secure some form of work permit would likely trigger a mass
exodus, resulting in a significant labour shortage. As the demand for labour increases
exponentially, the restrictions imposed by the withdrawal of free movement would present a
resourcing challenge, particularly for sectors that are heavily reliant on migrant labour such
as hospitality (Baum et al., 2007). Furthermore, the Bank of England (2018) reports pay
growth in response to labour market conditions. The growth of pay provides a stark
contrast to the 2008–2009 recession when wages were subdued due to the increase in
unemployment. Labour market pressures may affect employers’ decisions to increase wages
to maintain competitiveness but social exchange theory implies that in return for higher
wages employers expect higher quality returns demonstrated through increased
commitment and capability (Khoreva et al., 2017).

Conclusion
This paper has drawn past insight to present an informed discussion about the potential
implications of Brexit to HR practice. Four propositions have been offered as a starting point
to navigate the uncertainty about how the movement of talent within the UK will change.
The 2008–2009 recession, as a significant economic event, was a useful comparison to the
present climate; as can be expected established debates have resurfaced, for example the
war for talent. To help make sense of what Brexit means in practice, specifically in the case
of employee resourcing, Brexit may actually mean “nothing new”. The “war for talent” and
changing workplace demographics are not challenges born of Brexit exclusively, rather the
shifting political landscape has changed the perspective about how these challenges can be
approached. Contextually, however, Brexit is an extraordinary event and thus worthy of
discussion. The uncertainty caused by Brexit will continue to spark debate in relation to the
implications for people resourcing until negotiations have been completed and fully
disseminated. Uncertainty can cause employment relationships to become strained ( Jessop,
2011; Wood and Budhwar, 2016), signifying the importance of organisations maintaining
positive relations with employees during such ambiguous times.

Practical implications
It is difficult to solidify explicit recommendations in the face of the current uncertainty caused
by Brexit, yet there is speculation about how workers’ rights might be affected. Drawing on
the 2008–2009 recession, as a comparison, times of crisis can negatively impact employee
mindsets and their perception of opportunities in organisations (Markovits et al., 2014), calling
for employers to focus on drivers to improve mindsets. Following Brexit, while there may be Brexit
no immediate move to change UK legislation which is currently governed by the EU (Hodge,
2017), organisations could take policy decisions to honour EU standards. For example, a
future government may choose to rescind the working time limit, change holiday pay
calculations and remove the protection of part-time workers (Brodies, 2019); organisations
could act to build these entitlements into their policies to provide reassurance to employees.
Uncertainty calls for solidarity between employers and employees (Lulle et al., 2018); 1041
employers must take the lead by being transparent and proactively supporting employees.
As Macleavy (2018) highlights, Brexit could be a trigger to address existing equality
issues, such as the gender pay gap, by building on existing policies which exceed EU
standards (Suff, 2016), for example, parental leave. Taking proactive action now may help
employers to respond to the scenarios, alluded to in this paper, that they may face.

Directions for future research

The unprecedented nature of Brexit presents many avenues for future research to continue
the debate and shape the conversation by bringing an HR voice to the discussion. Drawing
on the propositions presented in this paper, the following research questions are proposed
for future empirical studies:
RQ1. How are employers responding to retention challenges triggered by Brexit?
RQ2. Is the UK experiencing a skills deficit because of Brexit? If so, how is the skills
deficit being addressed by organisations?
RQ3. What are the resourcing implications of Brexit on immigration to the UK from
outside of the EEA?
RQ4. How are employers using flexible working practices to address labour shortages,
post-Brexit?

References
Alfano, M., Dustmann, C. and Frattini, T. (2016), “Immigration and the UK: reflections after Brexit”, in
Fasani, F. (Ed.), Refugees and Economic Migrants: Facts, Policies and Challenges, CEPR Press,
London, pp. 55-80.
Armstrong, M. (2017), Armstrong’s Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, 14th ed.,
Kogan Page, London.
Bank of England (2018), “Inflation report”, Bank of England, London, available at: www.
bankofengland.co.uk (accessed 16 August 2018).
Baum, T., Dutton, E., Karimi, S., Kokkranikal, J., Devine, F. and Hearns, N. (2007), “Cultural diversity in
hospitality work”, Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, Vol. 14 No. 3,
pp. 229-239.
Bell, D. and Blanchflower, D. (2010), “UK unemployment in the great recession”, National Institute
Economic Review, Vol. 214 No. 1, pp. 3-25.
Brakman, S., Garretsen, H. and Kohl, T. (2018), “Consequences of brexit and options for a ‘Global
Britain’”, Papers in Regional Science, Vol. 97 No. 1, pp. 55-72.
Brinkley, I. and Crowley, E. (2017), “From ‘inadequate’ to making the UK’s skills system world class”,
available at: www.cipd.co.uk (accessed 18 May 2017).
Brodies, L.L.P. (2019), “Brexit: the implications for employment law”, available at: https://brodies.com
(accessed 18 April 2019).
ER Capelos, T., Exadaktylos, T., Chrona, S. and Poulopoulou, M. (2018), “News media and the emotional
41,5 public sphere: the emotional economy of the European financial crisis in the UK press”,
International Journal of Communication, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 2088-2113.
Caro, E., Berntsen, L., Lillie, N. and Wagner, I. (2017), “Posted migration and segregation in the
European construction sector”, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, Vol. 41 No. 10,
pp. 1600-1620.
1042 Chapman, B. (2019), “Which companies are leaving UK, downsizing or cutting jobs ahead of Brexit?”,
The Independent, 26 February, available at: www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/
brexit-companies-leaving-uk-list-job-cuts-eu-no-deal-customs-union-a8792296.html (accessed
11 April 2019).
Cheese, P. (2010), “Talent management for a new era: what we have learned from the recession and
what we need to focus on next”, Human Resource Management International Digest, Vol. 18
No. 3, pp. 3-5.
Chubb, C., Reilly, P. and Usher, T. (2010), Learning from the Downturn: Key Messages from an
Employer Perspective, Institute for Employment Studies, Brighton.
Churchard, C. (2009), “Migrant workers still crucial to recession hit UK, says CIPD”, People
Management, 12 August.
CIPD (2017a), “Labour market outlook”, CIPD, London.
CIPD (2017b), “Policy report”, CIPD, London.
CIPD (2017c), “Resourcing and talent planning”, CIPD, London.
Cory, G., Roberts, C. and Thorley, C. (2017), “Care in a post-Brexit climate how to raise standards and
meet workforce challenges”, Institute for Public Policy Research, London.
Coyle, D. (2016), “Brexit and globalisation”, in Baldwin, R.E. (Ed.), Brexit Beckons: Thinking Ahead by
Leading Economists, CEPR Press, London, pp. 23-28.
Davies, G. and Rolfe, H. (2017), Facing the Future: Tackling Post-Brexit Labour and Skills Shortages,
CIPD, London.
Dolphin, T. and Hatfield, I. (2015), “The missing pieces: solving Britain’s productivity puzzle”, available at:
www.ippr.org/publications/the-missing-pieces-solving-the-uks-productivity-puzzle (accessed
16 August 2017).
Dustmann, C., Fabbri, F. and Preston, I. (2005), “The impact of immigration on the British labour
market”, The Economic Journal, Vol. 115 No. 507, pp. 324-341.
Elving, W.J.L., Westhoff, Jorinde, J.C., Meeusen, K. and Schoonderbeek, J.-W. (2013), “The war for
talent? The relevance of employer branding in job advertisements for becoming an employer of
choice”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 355-373, available at: https://doi.org/
10.1057/bm.2012.21
Elsby, M. and Smith, J. (2010), “The great recession in the UK labour market: a transatlantic
perspective”, National Institute Economic Review, Vol. 214 No. 1, pp. 26-37.
Farndale, E., Scullion, H. and Sparrow, P. (2010), “The role of the corporate HR function in global talent
management”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 161-168.
Felstead, A., Green, F. and Jewson, N. (2012), “An analysis of the impact of the 2008–2009 recession on
the provision of training in the UK”, Work, Employment & Society, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 968-986.
Ford, M.D. (2016), “Workers’ rights from Europe: the impact of Brexit”, available at: www.tuc.org.uk/
sites/default/files/BrexitLegal Opinion.pdf (accessed 12 April 2017).
Hatzigeorgiou, A. and Lodefalk, M. (2016), “The Brexit trade disruption revisited”, Journal of
International Law and Trade Policy, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 41-58.
HM Government (2018), “The UK’s future skills-based immigration system”, HM Government, London,
available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk (accessed 20 March 2019).
Hobolt, S.B. (2016), “The Brexit vote: a divided nation, a divided continent”, Journal of European Public
Policy, Vol. 23 No. 9, pp. 1259-1277.
Hodge, N. (2017), “Preparing for Brexit”, Risk Management, Vol. 64 No. 6, pp. 18-25. Brexit
ILO (2012), “World of work report 2012: better jobs for a better economy”, International Labour
Organization, Geneva.
Khoreva, V., Vaiman, V. and Van Zalk, M. (2017), “Talent management practice effectiveness:
investigating employee perspective”, Employee Relations, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 19-33.
Jessop, B. (2011), “Rethinking the diversity and varieties of capitalism: on variegated capitalism in the
world market”, in Wood, G. (Ed.), Capitalist Diversity and Diversity within Capitalism, pp. 1043
209-237, available at: www.researchgate.net/publication/311992136
Krakovsky, M. (2017), “How HR can promote flexibility in blue-collar jobs”, Society for Human
Resource Management, Alexandria, Virginia, available at: www.shrm.org
Kuron, L.K.J., Lyons, S.T., Schweitzer, L. and Ng, E.S.W. (2015), “Millennials’ work values: differences
across the school to work transition”, Personnel Review, Vol. 44 No. 6, pp. 991-1009.
Lea, R. (2018), The Past Four UK Recessions Compared, and No Recession Expected on Brexit,
Arbuthnot Banking Group plc, London, available at: www.arbuthnotgroup.com (accessed
10 April 2019).
Linacre, S. (2017), “Failing to prepare. Prepare to fail?”, Human Resource Management International
Digest, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 34-36.
Lulle, A., Moroşanu, L. and King, R. (2018), “And then came Brexit: experiences and future plans of
young EU migrants in the London region”, Population, Space and Place, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 1-11.
McDonnell, A. (2011), “Still fighting the ‘war for talent’? Bridging the science versus practice gap”,
Journal of Business Psychology, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 169-173.
Macleavy, J. (2018), “Space and polity women, equality and the UK’s EU referendum: locating the
gender politics of Brexit in relation to the neoliberalising state”, Space and Polity, Vol. 22 No. 2,
pp. 205-223.
Marangozov, R. and Williams, M. (2016), “How will Brexit affect the NHS? The English trusts that
depend most on EU nurses, LSE Brexit”, available at: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/ (accessed 25
September 2017).
Markovits, Y., Boer, D. and Van Dick, R. (2014), “Economic crisis and the employee: the effects of
economic crisis on employee job satisfaction commitment, and self-regulation”, European
Management Journal, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 413-422.
Martin, R. and Gardiner, B. (2019), “The resilience of cities to economic shocks: a tale of four recessions
(and the challenge of Brexit)”, Papers in Regional Science, pp. 1-32.
Mason, G. and Bishop, K. (2015), “The impact of recession on adult training: evidence from the United
Kingdom in 2008–2009”, British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 736-759.
Meissner, F. and Vertovec, S. (2015), “Comparing super-diversity”, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Vol. 38
No. 4, pp. 541-555.
Menon, A. and Fowler, B. (2016), “Hard or soft? The politics of Brexit”, National Institute Economic
Review, Vol. 238 No. 1, pp. 4-12.
Migration Advisory Committee (2015), “Review of Tier 2”, Migration Advisory Committee, London.
Office for National Statistics (2016), “Contracts that do not guarantee a minimum number of hours”,
Office for National Statistics, London.
Office for National Statistics (2017), “Overview of the UK population: March 2017”, Office for National
Statistics, London.
Office for National Statistics (2019), “Migration statistics quarterly report”, Office for National
Statistics, London, February.
Orazulike, U. (2018), “Post-Brexit threats to work safety and health standards and good working
conditions in the UK”, Psychosociological Issues in Human Resource Management, Vol. 6 No. 1,
pp. 63-95.
ER O’Reilly, J., Froud, J., Johal, S., Williams, K., Warhurst, C., Morgan, G., Grey, C., Wood, G., Wright, M.,
41,5 Boyer, R., Frerichs, S., Sankari, S., Rona-Tas, A. and Le Galés, P. (2016), “Brexit: understanding
the socio-economic origins and consequences”, Socio-Economic Review, Vol. 14 No. 4,
pp. 807-854.
Portes, J. (2016), “Immigration after Brexit”, National Institute Economic Review, Vol. 238 No. 1, pp. 13-21.
Portes, J. and Forte, G. (2017), “The economic impact of Brexit-induced reductions in migration”, Oxford
1044 Review of Economic Policy, Vol. 3 No. S1, pp. S31-S44.
Portes, J. and Forte, G. (2017), “The economic impact of Brexit-induced reductions in migration”,
Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. S31-S44.
REC (2010), “Flex Appeal”, The Recruitment & Employment Confederation, London.
REC (2012), “REC flexible work commission report”, The Recruitment & Employment Confederation,
London.
Ridgway, M. (2017), “Opinion: why you might lose your British talent after Brexit, people
management”, available at: www2.cipd.co.uk/pm (accessed 27 April 2017).
Ridgway, M. and Robson, F. (2018), “Exploring the motivation and willingness of self-initiated
expatriates, in the civil engineering industry, when considering employment opportunities in
Qatar”, Human Resource Development International, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 24-45.
Robson, M. (2009), “Structural change, specialization and regional labour market performance:
evidence for the UK”, Applied Economics, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 275-293.
Rolfe, H. (2016), “How to cope with Brexit: an employers’ guide, LSE Brexit”, available at: blogs.lse.ac.
uk (accessed 25 September 2017).
Scullion, H., Sparrow, P. and Farndale, E. (2011), “Global talent management: new challenges for the
corporate HR function in the global recession”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 1 No. 78,
pp. 97-114.
Sharman, J. and Jones, I. (2017), “Hate crimes rise by up to 100 per cent across England and Wales,
figures reveal”, The Independent, 15 February, available at: www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/
home-news/brexit-vote-hate-crime-rise-100-per-cent-england-wales-police-figures-new-racism-
eu-a7580516.html (accessed 27 April 2017).
Simionescu, M., Bilan, Y., Smrcka, L. and Vincurova, Z. (2017), “The effects of European economic
integration and the impact of Brexit on the UK immigrants from the CEE countries”, Ekonomie a
Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 29-47.
Sparrow, P., Farndale, E. and Scullion, H. (2013), “An empirical study of the role of the corporate HR function
in global talent management in professional and financial service firms in the global financial crisis”,
The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 24 No. 9, pp. 1777-1798.
Srnicek, N. (2017), “The challenges of platform capitalism: understanding the logic of a new business
model”, Juncture, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 254-257.
Startin, N. (2015), “Have we reached a tipping point? The mainstreaming of Euroscepticism in the UK”,
International Political Science Review, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 311-323.
Stewart, J. (2017), “What are the (C)HRD implications of Brexit? A personal reflection?”, Human
Resource Development International, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 1-8.
Suff, R. (2016), “What will Brexit mean for UK employment law?”, CIPD, available at: www2.cipd.co.uk
(accessed 28 June 2017).
Sullivan, C. (2017), “Pret a manger targets British workers ahead of Brexit”, Financial Times, 27 April,
available at: www.ft.com/content/5cfd249c-2b12-11e7-9ec8-168383da43b7 (accessed 18 May 2017).
Sutton, R. and Staw, B.M. (1995), “What theory is not author”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40
No. 3, pp. 371-384.
Sumption, M. (2017a), “Labour immigration after Brexit: trade-offs and questions about policy”,
available at: www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk (accessed 1 October 2017).
Sumption, M. (2017b), “Labour immigration after Brexit: questions and trade-offs in designing a work Brexit
permit system for EU citizens”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol. 33, September,
pp. S45-S53, available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grx006
Sweet, R. and Smith, D. (2017), “Will China build tomorrow’s Britain? Examining the impacts of Brexit
and the skills crisis”, Construction Research and Innovation, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 2-12.
Taylor, M., Taylor, M., Marsh, G., Nicol, D. and Broadbent, P. (2017), “Good work: they taylor review of
modern working practices”, available at: www.gov.uk (accessed 9 April 2018).
1045
Teague, P. and Donaghey, J. (2018), “Brexit: EU social policy and the UK employment model”,
Industrial Relations Journal, Vol. 49 Nos 5–6, pp. 512-533.
Teague, P. and Roche, W.K. (2014), “Recessionary bundles: HR practices in the Irish economic crisis”,
Human Resource Management Journal, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 176-192.
Tilly, C. (2011), “The impact of the economic crisis on international migration: a review”, Work,
Employment & Society, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 675-692.
Tlaiss, H.A., Martin, P. and Hofaidhllaoui, M. (2017), “Talent retention: evidence from a multi-national
firm in France”, Employee Relations, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 426-445.
Trenz, H.-J. and Triandafyllidou, A. (2017), “Complex and dynamic integration processes in Europe:
intra EU mobility and international migration in times of recession”, Journal of Ethnic and
Migration Studies, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 546-559.
Vaiman, V., Scullion, H. and Collings, D.G. (2012), “Talent management decision making article”,
Management Decision, Vol. 50 No. 5, pp. 925-941, available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/002517412
11227663
Varma, A. and Russell, L. (2016), “Women and expatriate assignments: exploring the role of perceived
organizational support”, Employee Relations, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 200-223.
Vertovec, S. (2007), “Super-diversity and its implications”, Ethical and Racial Studies, Vol. 30 No. 6,
pp. 1024-1054.
Wadsworth, J., Dhingra, S., Ottaviano, G.I.P. and Reenen, J.V. (2016), Brexit and the Impact of
Immigration on the UK, Centre for Economic Performance, London.
Wasik, Z. (2017), “Homeward bound: polish ministers predict a rush of returnees”, Financial Times,
26 April, available at: www.ft.com/content/f973980e-2434-11e7-a34a-538b4cb30025 (accessed
27 April 2017).
Webster, J. and Watson, R.T. (2002), “Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature
review”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. xiii-xxiii.
Williams, S. and Turnbull, S. (2015), “Developing the next generation of globally responsible leaders”,
Advances in Developing Human Resources, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 504-521.
Wood, G. and Budhwar, P. (2016), “Brexit and beyond: the BJM and unforeseen events”, British Journal
of Management, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 680-681.
Woolfson, C. (2017), “The ‘Singapore scenario’: the uncertain prospects for labour standards in post-
Brexit Britain”, Industrial Relations Journal, Vol. 48 Nos 5–6, pp. 384-402.
Wright, M., Wilson, N., Gilligan, J., Bacon, N. and Amess, K. (2016), “Brexit, private equity and
management”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 682-686.

Corresponding author
Maranda Ridgway can be contacted at: maranda.ridgway@ntu.ac.uk

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com